In this essay I will explain the current United States policy over the Iran Nuclear Deal, I will explain the goal of this foreign policy and why this current policy fails to achieve this goal. I will then suggest an alternative policy and how my alternative policy meets the United States foreign policy goal. Lastly I will discuss strength for my alternative policy, as well as two weaknesses.
This American foreign policy describes the time frame in which Iran can obtain nuclear materials as well as aims to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. This policy addresses seven key areas centrifuges, uranium enrichment, breakout time, the Fordow facility, research and development, inspections, and lastly sanctions lifted.
First, Centrifuges are tube-shaped machines used to enrich uranium, the material necessary for nuclear power and nuclear bombs. Iran would have to reduce its total of about 19,000 centrifuges, 10,000 of which are still spinning today, down to 6,104 under the deal, with only 5,060 allowed to enrich uranium over the next ten years (Bradner 2015). Second, Iran’s centrifuges will only enrich uranium to 3.67%, enough for civil use to provide energy to parts of the country, but not enough to build a nuclear bomb. Iran will reduce its current stockpile of 10,000 kilograms of low-enriched uranium to 300 kilograms for 15 years (Bradner 2015). “Iran has agreed to limit uranium enrichment and ship its uranium fuel overseas for 10 years. Iran agreed to a 15-year ban on processing fuel that is close to being bomb grade” (Dorell 2015). Third, the breakout time, which is the period of time that it would take for Iran to acquire the material it needs to make one nuclear weapon, would be extended to one year under the deal, and wo...
... middle of paper ...
...urrent United States foreign policy over the Iran Nuclear Deal and how this current foreign policy fails to achieve the goal of making an Iranian nuclear bomb more difficult. In this essay I first explained what the current United States foreign policy over the Iran Nuclear Deal is, I also explained what the goal for this foreign policy is and why this current policy failed to achieve the goal. Second, I suggested an alternative policy and how this alternative policy meets the United States foreign policy goals. Third, I discussed the strengths for my alternative policy, as well as two weaknesses. Lastly, I concluded that the current United States foreign policy over the Iran Nuclear Deal should not be used in the United States, rather the alternative policy that I suggested is a more reliable policy, which would guarantee Iran would not use any nuclear materials.
In the novel All The Shah’s Men we are introduced to Iran, and the many struggles and hardships associated with the history of this troubled country. The Iranian coup is discussed in depth throughout the novel, and whether the Untied States made the right decision to enter into Iran and provide assistance with the British. If I were to travel back to 1952 and take a position in the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) for the sole purpose of examining the American Foreign Intelligence, I would have to conclude that the United States should have examined their options more thoroughly, and decided not to intervene with Iran and Mossadegh. I have taken this position after great analysis, which is something that Eisenhower and his staff never did. By discussing the history of Iran, the Anglo-Iranian oil company, and Document NSC-68 I will try to prove once and for all that going through with the coup in Iran was a terrible mistake made by the United States.
During the "Roaring Twenties" people were living up to the modern standards of society. Then the Great Depression began and the joy and excitement disappeared and tension manifested. In the time period of 1920-1941 America experienced major global events that occurred in extremely short rapid intervals of time. From the end of World War I in 1918 to the Roaring Twenties, straight to the Great Depression in 1929, into the beginning of World War II in 1939, and all the way to the horror of the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, America faced these occurrences with difficulty and confusion. But with the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, quick and immediate responses were made to stabilize America. Among his responses
Between 1895 and 1920, the years in which William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft, and Woodrow Wilson reigned in the presidents, the United States struggled for not only justice at home but abroad as well. During this period policies such as Roosevelt’s Big Stick diplomacy, William Taft’s Dollar diplomacy, and Woodrow Wilson’s Moral diplomacy were all used in foreign affairs in hopes of benefit for all involved. However, it would be appropriate to say that self-interest was the most important driving factor for American policy and can be exemplified through economic, social, and political relations.
The book A Concise History of U.S. Foreign Policy, by Joyce Kaufman, and the essay, American Foreign Policy Legacy by Walter Mead both acknowledge the history, and the importance of American foreign policy. The two argue that American foreign policy has always been an essential aspect of the prosperity and health of the United States. After reading these writings myself, I can agree that American foreign policy in the U.S. has always been detrimental to the success of this nation. Throughout history most Americans have had very little interest in foreign affairs, nor understood the importance. This essay will address the importance of foreign policy, why Americans have little interest in foreign affairs, and what the repercussions
...es when it comes to implementing controversial foreign policy decisions that directly affect Americans and those in different countries. The main aspect of the affair that greatly influences the United States’ government is ensuring that its past imperialistic motives do not become an integral part of American affairs once again.
Affirmative Case Introduction- "We must use every tool of diplomacy and law we have available, while maintaining both the capacity and the resolve to defend freedom. We must have the vision to explore new avenues when familiar ones seem closed. And we must go forward with a will as great as our goal – to build a practical peace that will endure through the remaining years of this century and far into the next.” Because I believe so strongly in the words of U.S. Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, when she spoke at the Stimson Center Event, June 10, 1998, that I ask you to affirm today’s resolution, “Resolved: The use of economic sanctions to achieve U.S. Foreign Policy goals is moral.
It is the intention of this essay to explain the United States foreign policy behind specific doctrines. In order to realize current objectives, this paper will proceed as follows: Part 1 will define the Monroe Doctrine, Sections 2, 3, 4, and 5 will concurrently explicate the Roosevelt Corollary, Good Neighbor Policy, and the Nixon Doctrine, discuss how each policy resulted in U.S. involvement in Latin American countries, describe how it was justified by the U.S. government, respectively, and finally, will bring this paper to a summation and conclusion.
George Washington, the first president of the United States, had written a very important historical speech and document towards the end of his time in office. He had written the Farewell address which focused on helping America understand the importance of preserving unity, acknowledging the rise of political parties forming, strengthening religion and morality, and he stated his position on American foreign policy. He addressed these ideas with strong tone and used incredible amount of dictions that strengthens his tone as well as representing his appeal to ethos to a strong degree. However, today’s society seemed to forget Washington’s position on foreign policy and has created a new form of the policy. But nonetheless as time grew, change occurs. In today’s society Washington’s foreign policy would include many positive and negative manifestations, but it is still a speech and document that will always apply to America.
“Until early in [the twentieth] century, the isolationist tendency prevailed in American foreign policy. Then, two factors projected America into world affairs: its rapidly expanding power, and the gradual collapse of the international system centered on Europe” . President Woodrow Wilson was the leader who would initiate the ideologies of American diplomacy in the twentieth century. Up until his Presidency, American foreign policy was simply to fulfill the course of manifest destiny, and to remain free of entanglements overseas. Although he could not convince his fellow politicians on Capitol Hill of the probable success of his ideas, he did persuade the fellow writers of the Treaty of Versailles to use his Fourteen Points. America’s role as a political global superpower was established during his Presidency, as well as the modern policy that peace depends on the spread of democracy, and that national interest consists of adhering to a global system of law.
As we approach the next Presidential election the topic of American foreign policy is once again in the spotlight. In this paper, I will examine four major objectives of U.S. foreign policy that have persisted throughout the twentieth century and will discuss the effect of each on our nation’s recent history, with particular focus on key leaders who espoused each objective at various times. In addition, I will relate the effects of American foreign policy objectives, with special attention to their impact on the American middle class. Most importantly, this paper will discuss America’s involvement in WWI, WWII, and the Cold War to the anticipated fulfillment of these objectives—democracy, manifest destiny, humanitarianism, and economic expansion.
Iran is a nation that, due to its diabolical deeds, demands constant surveillance. Consequently, the slightest remark relating to the Iranian Nuclear Program triggers fear within the United States Government. The Program is infamous for the controversial use of nuclear facilities and research sites. David Ignatius writes in his novel, The Increment, about a clandestine effort by the United States to stop the Iranian production of weapons-grade nuclear materials. The novel commences in Tehran, Iran, with a scientist who works for the Iranian nuclear program. The scientist, named Karim Molavi, is distraught with his country’s government because his father, a martyr, was killed by the national military. To compensate for his rage, Karim sends
However, the president was a moderate, therefore he was concerned with both economics and the environment. As a member of the domestic policy group and as the Director of the NEC, I felt that most of the conflicts transpired because it was difficult to satisfy both the economic and environmental needs. As a result, though extremely difficult, our group strived to create a policy proposal with five parts each aimed at addressing either the economy or the environment. Similarly, in the foreign policy simulation, it was also difficult for participants to create a U.S. foreign policy that allowed the United States to work with Russia in order to remove Assad without committing United States ground forces. However, members in the foreign policy group also had to strive to advance the economic interests and protect the safety of the United States. Correspondingly, the crisis simulation also demonstrates the complexity of presidential decision-making. At this juncture, in the crisis simulation participants had difficulty deciding how the United States should respond to the Israel intelligence stating that Iran has nuclear capabilities. During the simulation, participants
Maddox, Robert. “The Biggest Decision: Why We Had to Drop the Atomic Bomb.” Taking Sides: Clashing View in United States History. Ed. Larry Madaras & James SoRelle. 15th ed. New York, NY. 2012. 280-288.
Proceeding from a simplistic perception of regional stability, Washington utilized the surrogate strategy to control the outcomes of regional interactions in the Middle East and chose Israel to play the role of regional surrogate. But Israel, in many cases, instead of maintaining regional stability on behalf of the US, served its own interests which were not always consistent with US interest in regional stability. The Israeli violations, however, were either condoned or even approved by the US administrations. These reactions comprised what this chapter addressed as a pro-Israel model of intervention.
Endicott, John E.; Johnson, Loch K.; Papp, Daniel S. (2005) American foreign policy: history, politics and policy. N.Y.: Pearson.